Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

wangcong.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 599 posts

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#191

Post by what »

folkrav wrote: post #92
auggierose wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every "fact" you state really includes the opinion that the "fact" is indeed a fact. Is climate change man-made?

Do I need to hold the opinion that water is wet for it to be factual? To answer your question, if by climate change you refer to the dramatic post-industrialisation acceleration of warming and climate disturbances, the correct answer is "the overwhelming majority of existing evidence points to yes".

Is water wet though? It’s the substance that makes other things wet, but is it wet itself?

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#193

Post by armchairhacker »

Some reasons I still argue over the internet

- To convince myself. Sometimes I start writing and convince myself I’m wrong. Other times I just move to a more specific opinion or find a stronger justification

- Because sometimes a responder does convince me to change my opinion. Or they provide some interesting related information I didn't know before

- To be a voice of reason in comments mostly by people dumb enough to feel their surface-level opinion is still worth posting. Although obviously I’m only a voice of reason to those who share my opinions, sometimes even I recognize I’m again restating an obvious observation

- To get better at writing and arguing in case one day it does really matter

- Because I’m bored and have nothing better to do. At least it’s more productive than YouTube

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#194

Post by shellkr »

Dumblydorr wrote: post #4

They never mention they could’ve been wrong. The author assumes they’re always right, but that trying to convince others and argue them to their right side is not valuable. How about: maybe I’m wrong and I didn’t let their ideas influence me. How about: even when I think I’m right, it will be better to calmly kindly discuss, listening as much as talking, not debating or arguing or speaking over them, but attempting t…

Yes, my thought exactly.. In my experience it is always how you behave when arguing. If you "blame" the other will become defensive and nothing is accomplished. If you generalize and and talk in a helpful supportive way they will see their fault themselves and correct the fault. I usually get most on my side. We openly discuss and I genuinely look for faults in my own arguments too.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#196

Post by miyoji »

anthonypasq wrote: post #81
a4isms wrote: post #60

Here's a simple idea: You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. And three interpretations to consider: 0: The default: That person is irrationally attached to being wrong. Best to walk away, argumentation will be futile, and I have a life to lead. 1: Whoa! Sometimes that person is me. 2: If they didn't reason themselves into it, how did they get into it? What if their position rep…

> You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. this is a pithy think to say but its really not true, and every person that has lost their religion and been convinced by rational argument is a counter example.

People aren't convinced by rational arguments. Someone who does not believe in god will not be convinced to believe by a proof of god's existence, and someone with faith will not become an atheist because someone debunks the proof.

The rational arguments form a structure that beliefs can hang on, but the core process of changing ones mind is not rational. Like many people, I have changed my thinking on many topics over the course of my life, and arguments that I used to find convincing I now consider to be filled with holes, and arguments I used to think were paper-thin now seem stronger than steel. You can find a rational argument for most beliefs, and you can tear down a rational argument for most beliefs.

Reason just isn't how we form our beliefs at all, it's how we convince ourselves that the things we believe are true.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#197

Post by 21asdffdsa12 »

yodsanklai wrote: post #124
Dumblydorr wrote: post #4

They never mention they could’ve been wrong. The author assumes they’re always right, but that trying to convince others and argue them to their right side is not valuable. How about: maybe I’m wrong and I didn’t let their ideas influence me. How about: even when I think I’m right, it will be better to calmly kindly discuss, listening as much as talking, not debating or arguing or speaking over them, but attempting t…

I noticed that with some people (and possibly most people), it's not even a matter of who's wrong or right, simply asking to justify or explain their claims may be perceived as an attack and enough to trigger an argument.

The problem is conflict avoidance behavior. We are hardwired to prevent conflict with the in-group (family/clan) to prevent loss of life due to strife - at the same time that does not hold up for the out-group.

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#198

Post by throw0101a »

xXSLAYERXx wrote: post #177
rob74 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 52, and over my lifetime I felt that there is actually an ever-increasing number of things that used to have an absolute right (scientifically proven) answer that become controversial. Climate change. Vaccines. Whether the earth is round - that kind of stuff. And, while I agree with the author's approach to let people learn from the consequences of their mistakes, what if the consequences of their mistakes (or th…

[flagged]

> If a flat earther became president what would be the consequences? Will we still have AC in the summer and heat in the winter, food on the table etc? Its fruitless going down the rabbit hole based off "what if". Look at the last US election.

What if a climate denier became/becomes president? What would be the consequences?

And not just on the planet but more locally: the folks that have to deal with hurricanes or wildfires? What happens to insurance rates? What happens if we stay very dependent on petroleum, and oil prices spike? What happens to people's cost of living (esp. food, which is transported by truck and use oil in fertilizer)?

Re: Most arguments are about ego, not ideas

#199

Post by jnd-cz »

khalic wrote: post #110
croes wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There people that gravity doesn’t exist and it’s some kind of buoyancy. Death as the final end of existence? There are many religions that claim that isn’t true. Nowadays it’s even harder who wrote what but next week if I don’t find that text again, can I be sure it was written or could be just in a dream?

1. yes they are objectively wrong, a persons belief does not need to be tied to a fact 2. death as in death of the body, it's very much inescapable 3. the last part is just uncertainty, hardly an argument against objective reality

Ad 2, How do you define it, precisely? Today we have the technology to keep the body alive even if it would stop functioning long time ago on it's own. Is the person still alive? Is the body still alive? Some bodies need permanent technical devices to be able to live, yet they can reach high age. Is it cheating or not?
Post reply on HN